So you agree that blacks are disproportionally to there population numbers, higher recipients of welfare. Good. That said, my reasoning behind it, is that culturally they seem to know no better, that it is a cycle that they are raised to be in. Learning and getting a job is being an Uncle Tom. I don't need a chart to show me that, I've seen it with interactions I've had with black people. I know two guys who say the same thing, who are black, and are embarrassed by it. That said, I think the whites who are poor welfare monkeys, and hate blacks, are just as fucking bad. They have no idea that they are the same in most successful people's eyes as the very groups they despise. I think the whole lot of them are dispicable and should be put on work farms, or put to work on highway projects, so that they may learn a trade. Just my two cents.

McTones, how can you have this much difficulty following a conversation? The thread was started by the Patron Loon of Getbig, claiming that a rep made a claim of racism when she didn't. The entire bill addresses a problem that doesn't exist. The woman never said anything about race- she did say that the bill is an attempt to debase and scapegoat welfare recipients, most of whom , not incidentally, are WHITE.

McTones, how can you have this much difficulty following a conversation? The thread was started by the Patron Loon of Getbig, claiming that a rep made a claim of racism when she didn't. The entire bill addresses a problem that doesn't exist. The woman never said anything about race- she did say that the bill is an attempt to debase and scapegoat welfare recipients, most of whom , not incidentally, are WHITE.

agreed and I simply pointed out that its to be expected that majority of ppl on welfare and food stamps are white b/c white make up the biggest % of race in our population.

I also pointed out that blacks make up a disproportionately larger % of welfare and food stamp receipients compared to their total population %

LOL what confusion? the reason I asked is b/c he asked about the significance of mine and I said it held the same significance as his...

I asked the question to get him to think about it, not b/c I was actually confused.

Really? So, you were arguing that cracking down of food stamp fraud is racist?

Quote

LOL again, did you search the threads about gun control?if you had youd have found it champ

There are about 20 active gun control threads on the first page. You have a history of posting stats that say the exact opposite of what you think they say and then trying to hide behind an info dump. I've never heard anyone else claim that states with stricter gun control have 1/3 the homicide rate, so if you actually had a legit stat on that, I'd love to see it. As of right now, I'm positive you completely misunderstood whatever it was you posted (if you actually posted anything.)

Really? So, you were arguing that cracking down of food stamp fraud is racist?

There are about 20 active gun control threads on the first page. You have a history of posting stats that say the exact opposite of what you think they say and then trying to hide behind an info dump. I've never heard anyone else claim that states with stricter gun control have 1/3 the homicide rate, so if you actually had a legit stat on that, I'd love to see it. As of right now, I'm positive you completely misunderstood whatever it was you posted (if you actually posted anything.)

"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000. Less access to psychiatric inpatient-beds and more poorly rated mental health systems were associated with increases in the homicide rates of 1.08 and 0.26 per 100,000, respectively."

now wouldnt addressing mental illness address the problem at the root?

"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000. Less access to psychiatric inpatient-beds and more poorly rated mental health systems were associated with increases in the homicide rates of 1.08 and 0.26 per 100,000, respectively."

When you read the second quote, do you actually think that actually means these states have 1/3 the homicide rate. As I said, you clearly did not understand what you were quoting.

Your quote from another thread, that I've been asking for data on:Your support:When you read the second quote, do you actually think that actually means these states have 1/3 the homicide rate. As I said, you clearly did not understand what you were quoting.

That quote doesnt say anything about the % it decreases homicides that was simply to show you that stronger mental health attention ACTUALLY ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM!!!!

unlike gun laws which HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO NOT WORK!!!!!!

so do you admit now that my suggestions of stronger mental health laws and more education/awareness will help address the actual problem?

"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000. Less access to psychiatric inpatient-beds and more poorly rated mental health systems were associated with increases in the homicide rates of 1.08 and 0.26 per 100,000, respectively."

That quote doesnt say anything about the % it decreases homicides that was simply to show you that stronger mental health attention ACTUALLY ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM!!!!

LOL McTones, you claimed that you had stats that showed that states with "looser commitment laws" had 1/3 the homicide rate. I knew that was hogwash and asked you to post a simple link. You could have posted anything you wanted. If those stats exist and you have the link, you can still post them,. But they don't exist.

LOL McTones, you claimed that you had stats that showed that states with "looser commitment laws" had 1/3 the homicide rate. I knew that was hogwash and asked you to post a simple link. You could have posted anything you wanted. If those stats exist and you have the link, you can still post them,. But they don't exist.

hahaha that link shows it there champ...

also it shows that addressing mental illness lowers the homocide rate even(even if you want to quibble about the amount)

so do you now agree that addressing mental illness and more education/awareness will address the problem at the root?

also it shows that addressing mental illness lowers the homocide rate even(even if you want to quibble about the amount)

so do you now agree that addressing mental illness and more education/awareness will address the problem at the root?

answer the question albert...

The link does not show it and four posts above this one you admit that. 1/3 homicide rate vs. a decrease of 0.26 murders/per 100,000 is not "quibbling". I have said in other threads that American mental health policy could use a lot of improvement, but nothing you've posted has proven that improved policy is a sound alternative to gun control. All you're proven is that you misunderstood what you posted, like I assumed had to be the case.

The link does not show it and four posts above this one you admit that. 1/3 homicide rate vs. a decrease of 0.26 murders/per 100,000 is not "quibbling". I have said in other threads that American mental health policy could use a lot of improvement, but nothing you've posted has proven that improved policy is a sound alternative to gun control. All you're proven is that you misunderstood what you posted, like I assumed had to be the case.

LOL whats the average rate of murders per 100,000?

"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000"

seeing as gun control has been proven time and time again to be ineffective at stopping gun crimes...Id say this is a great alternative.

Seeing as the ppl that commit mass murders in the past have generally been mentally ill to some degree...Id say this is a great alternative.

The link does not show it and four posts above this one you admit that. 1/3 homicide rate vs. a decrease of 0.26 murders/per 100,000 is not "quibbling".

PS...the .26 was in regards to an increase in gun homocides related to poorly rated mental health systems alone...

"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000. Less access to psychiatric inpatient-beds and more poorly rated mental health systems were associated with increases in the homicide rates of 1.08 and 0.26 per 100,000, respectively."

Not even... the findings are WEIGHTED, which is why the researcher says the figures are "associated" with certain findings rather than "attributed to". Both McTones and I have already posted that the study calims socio/economic/polital factors are stronger indicators. You can click on the study and see the equation the researcher used. Simply put, it's not half or 1/3.

Not even... the findings are WEIGHTED, which is why the researcher says the figures are "associated" with certain finding rather than "attributed to". Both McTones and I have already posted that the study calims socio/economic/polital factors are stronger indicators. You can click on the study and see the equation the researcher used. Simply put, it's not half or 1/3.

sure.

LOL my assertion that states with looser commitment laws have 1/3 less gun homocides isnt correct?

really??? LMFAOso the average is 3.7 and as the study states "Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000."